Bibliographic record
Abstract
Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size Notes 1. US Geological Survey, ‘90 Billion Barrels of Oil and 1,670 Trillion Cubic Feet of Natural Gas Assessed in the Arctic’, at http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=1980&from=rss_home (Accessed February 4, 2013). 2. Chatham House Report, ‘Arctic Opening: Opportunity and Risk in the High North’, p. 32, at http://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/default/files/public/Research/Energy,%20Environment%20and%20Development/0412arctic.pdf (Accessed February 5, 2013). 3. Heather Conley and Jamie Kraut, ‘US Strategic Interests in the Arctic: An Assessment of Current Challenges and New Opportunities for Cooperation’, A Report of the CSIS Europe Program, April 2010, Center for Strategic and International Studies, p. 7. 4. Paul Arthur Berkman, ‘Our Common Future in the Arctic Ocean, The Round Table’, The Commonwealth Journal of International Affairs, 101(2), 2012, p. 126. 5. See Canadian American Strategic Review website, at http://www.casr.ca/id-arctic-empires-2.htm (Accessed March 7, 2013). 6. See Canadian Prime Minister's Office website, at http://pm.gc.ca/eng/media.asp?id=1742 (Accessed March 7, 2013). 7. See ‘Statement on Canada's Arctic Foreign Policy’, available http://www.international.gc.ca/polar-polaire/assets/pdfs/CAFP_booklet-PECA_livret-eng.pdf (Accessed March 7, 2013). 8. See ‘Arctic: Canada's Sabre-Rattling and Russia's Strategic Interests’, article in Pravda, at http://english.pravda.ru/world/americas/31-08-2010/114818-canada_arctic-0/ (Accessed March 7, 2013). 9. See Canadian Forces Canada Command website, at http://www.emeraldsiberians.com/nr-sp/bg-do/11-001-nanook-eng.asp (Accessed on March 7, 2013). 10. See Nikolaj Petersen, ‘The Arctic as a New Arena for Danish Foreign Policy’, in Nanna Hvidt and Hans Mouritzen (eds.), Danish Foreign Policy Yearbook, Danish Institute for International studies, Copenhagen, 2009, p. 38. 11. See ‘Danish Defence Agreement 2010–2014’, at http://www.fmn.dk/nyheder/Documents/20090716%20Samlede%20Forligstekst%202010-2014%20inkl%20bilag%20-%20english.pdf (Accessed March 9, 2013). 12. See ‘Danish Defence Agreement 2013–2017’, at http://www.fmn.dk/eng/allabout/Documents/TheDanishDefenceAgrement2013-2017english-version.pdf (Accessed March 9, 2013). 13. Ibid., p. 1. 14. Heather Conley and Jamie Kraut, no. 3, p. 24. 15. Heather Conley and Jamie Kraut, no. 3, p. 25. 16. ‘Russia Plans Arctic Army Brigades’, at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-13997324 (Accessed March 10, 2013). 17. ‘Russia's Arctic Force May Include Paratroopers’, at http://en.rian.ru/military_news/20110728/165434778.html (Accessed March 10, 2013). 18. Available at http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/nspd/nspd-66.htm (Accessed March 15, 2013). 19. Ibid. 20. Ibid. 21. US Department of Defense (DOD), ‘Report to Congress on Arctic Operations and the Northwest Passage’, at http://www.defense.gov/pubs/pdfs/Tab_A_Arctic_Report_Public.pdf (Accessed March 26, 2013), p. 20. 22. Ibid.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".